Re: [sidr] Signed vs unsgned and bgp best path decision

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Hello Ruediger,

Many thx for your reply.

> don't interfere with whatever chaos (you think) the operator is working with.

By chaos I meant complete autonomous selection of what paths are 
preferred to be chosen as best on an AS by AS basis. In the case of 
mixed SIGNED and UNSIGNED paths being consider in this _local_ decision 
as you stated it seems to me just like it is the case with bad 
uncorrelated policies more harm can be accomplished then good.

Are you guaranteeing that such local autonomy how to prefer signed vs 
unsigned paths is safe in the bigger picture ?

> Just provide the operator with trustworthy information

While signed BGP information may be made trustworthy I think the end 
goal is that your customers will get service they pay for meaning that 
their packets will reach the destination. How singed BGP updates are 
sufficient to accomplish such goal if anyone on the path by simple 
static route may overwrite directly in the data plane such trustworthy 
information and redirect your customer packets left and right without 
you knowing about it ?

Note that such overwrite would not happen if BGP would _always_ 
advertise only RIB/FIB active routes, but we all know that this is not 
always the case in some major implementations.

Regards,
R.